The High Court disposed of the appeal involving CENVAT credit demands. The court observed that the gain from the appeal was meager, leading to the disposal without substantive adjudication while keeping questions open for future cases.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
18-CEXA.184.2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 184 OF 2016
Aman Medical Products Pvt. Ltd. } Appellant versus The Commissioner, Central Excise } and Service Tax, Daman } Commissionerate } Respondent
Mr. Jas Sanghvi i/b. M/s. PDS Legal for the appellant.
Ms. P. S. Cardozo for the respondent.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE :- JANUARY 22, 2018
P.C. :-
Page 1 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
18-CEXA.184.2016.doc
Therefore, keeping the questions open for being raised in an
appropriate case, we dispose of the appeal.
(SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
Aman Medical Products Pvt. Ltd.
The Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Daman Commissionerate
S. C. Dharmadhikari
Bharati H. Dangre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
